4 ms·
Is more people living in that area beneficial to society?
by taberiand 3y ago
Is more people living in that area beneficial to society?
- Manuel_D 3y agoLower housing cost is generally beneficial to society. Making activities like skiing less exclusive and more accessible is also a benefit. One could argue that skiing doesn't directly benefit society. But by that logic there's not much benefit to art, entertainment, parks, and essentially anything other than food, housing, and healthcare.
- Petersipoi 3y agoSki resorts are already way overcrowded, despite the insane lift prices. How is making it more accessible going to help anything? It's already at maximum capacity.
- throwitaway222 3y agoBuild more mountains, duh! /s
- Manuel_D 3y agoIf they really were at maximum capacity, then ticket sales would drop. But that's not happening.
- Petersipoi 3y agoNo. Not if the price is at an equilibrium that optimizes for maximum capacity.
- Manuel_D 3y agoThen why are people spending so much to buy these houses? The demand is there, if the mountains really are as packed as you claim there wouldn't be so much demand to have easy access to the ski mountain.
- piuantiderp 3y agoThis is my pet peeve. There is so much cheap land elsewhere but everyone HAS to live in Beverly Hills, 5th Ave, etc... etc... Lots of places are just attractive because wealthy people live there and keep them nice. You densify it and it'll go to the drain quicker than anything.
- paleotrope 3y agoThe subtext here is that the big seasonal employers can find anyone to work locally. And all the other businesses can't pay people enough to work on the lowest tier jobs. Pay people enough that won't hit their bottom line. So you really have the very rich and the somewhat rich fighting it out here. The solution would be temporary housing that is 20 miles away that they could bus in the workers but no one likes the way that would look.